"...putting together all the data that disproves that the “market is efficient”... "

That's hilarious. Of course the market isn't perfectly efficient, no market ever is. When the books hold around 5% they don't need a perfectly efficient market, just one that's good enough to keep them profitable over enough trials.
 
That's hilarious. Of course the market isn't perfectly efficient, no market ever is. When the books hold around 5% they don't need a perfectly efficient market, just one that's good enough to keep them profitable over enough trials.

I assume he'll be looking at it from a bettor's perspective, not the perspective of the books.

The OP says nothing about anything being "perfect".
 
I assume he'll be looking at it from a bettor's perspective, not the perspective of the books.

The OP says nothing about anything being "perfect".

I think we all know its not perfect from that side either. How else could every one of us know of some horrible bettors who fall for every trap and pick at a 40-45% rate year after year? Surely there are those on the other side of that who pick well and beat the market.
 
The OP speaks of disproving that the "market is efficient".

"What Is Market Efficiency?
Market efficiency refers to the degree to which market prices reflect all available, relevant information. If markets are efficient, then all information is already incorporated into prices, and so there is no way to "beat" the market because there are no undervalued or overvalued securities available." "

https://www.investopedia.com/terms/m/marketefficiency.asp
 
current market price in any commodity reflects both current market information AND current market uninformed biases. huge distinction. market efficiency assumes uniform knowledge, which is a fallacy. it exists in hyper-traded environments like the NYSE, but not when it pertains to the line Pinny puts on the Knicks next Saturday.
 

GameBred

I Trade Therefore I Am
The OP speaks of disproving that the "market is efficient".

"What Is Market Efficiency?
Market efficiency refers to the degree to which market prices reflect all available, relevant information. If markets are efficient, then all information is already incorporated into prices, and so there is no way to "beat" the market because there are no undervalued or overvalued securities available." "

https://www.investopedia.com/terms/m/marketefficiency.asp

This is an incorrect understanding of Market Efficiency. The Founder of the theory will tell you that all Prices are wrong but no one knows in which direction. I've heard Fama say it so you can take that for what it's worth.

Efficiency in Sporting Markets is much more cut and dry as it is easily testable.

You also have to ask if the "Price" is efficient throughout it's Finite Life Cycle? Fuck no and that's all you really need to know. Think about it, if it was efficient throughout it's life cycle, Sharps would have nothing to do.

In general, the Major Sporting Markets are Macro-Efficient w/ Micro-Inefficiencies.
 
X-files are you Sherwood?

Nope.

In the past year i've noticed him speaking about beating the closing lines. There is the notion/theory/viewpoint that a number of people have that if anyone consistently beats the closing lines, then they are going to be a winner, or at least probably a winner, in the long run (assuming proper discipline in their betting, i.e. money management). This theory, if i am comprehending his understanding of it, also states that these allegedly sharp closing lines are a result of the "efficient market" (whatever that is supposed to mean in his mind & his definition). And, as the OP states, he intends to provide data disproving the "efficient market" theory.
 
Well for now I will jsut keep doing my part to beat the closing lines since that has worked for me for the last 15 years.

What's your secret to doing that? Watching Don Best 24/7? Capping the games? Intuition?

If i were a betting man, which i am, i would bet that the person quoted in the OP, who is primarily a dog bettor, and somewhat of a contrarian, beats the closing lines much more than he doesn't. [Based on his own knowledge of the sports, teams, games, betting markets, etc]. Does he make a profit because he beats the closing lines or because his bets are plus EV?
 

GameBred

I Trade Therefore I Am
Where do you find these guys?

1622139166624.png

Not trying to be a Dick but helpful, you're plugged into the wrong feeds. He's mixing and matching two different things and NO, it's not necessarily too late to buy XYZ Company.

How the fuck does he know where the XYZ Price is going? He doesn't. There are Multi-Millionares who made their Millions buying Brekouts, they get whipsawed alot but Jimmy Crack Corn and Pareto don't care.
 

GameBred

I Trade Therefore I Am
Where do you find these guys?

View attachment 7464180

Not trying to be a Dick but helpful, you're plugged into the wrong feeds. He's mixing and matching two different things and NO, it's not necessarily too late to buy XYZ Company.

How the fuck does he know where the XYZ Price is going? He doesn't. There are Multi-Millionares who made their Millions buying Brekouts, they get whipsawed alot but Jimmy Crack Corn and Pareto don't care.

Not trying to be Cryptic. There are Traders who make like 90% of their money from 10% of their Trades (80/20... give it a #). They don't know which one is going to go to the Moon but they do know how much they are prepared to lose should things go sideways. It's like a Venture Capital Model, the one or two big investment winners make up for all the smaller losses.
 
Last edited:

raycabino

Long Live Wilson!
What's your secret to doing that? Watching Don Best 24/7? Capping the games? Intuition?

If i were a betting man, which i am, i would bet that the person quoted in the OP, who is primarily a dog bettor, and somewhat of a contrarian, beats the closing lines much more than he doesn't. [Based on his own knowledge of the sports, teams, games, betting markets, etc]. Does he make a profit because he beats the closing lines or because his bets are plus EV?
Yes and yes.
 
Not trying to be Cryptic. There are Traders who make like 90% of their money from 10% of their Trades (80/20... give it a #). They don't know which one is going to go to the Moon but they do know how much they are prepared to lose should things go sideways. It's like a Venture Capitalist Model, the one or two big investment winners make up for all the smaller losses.

http://www.therxforum.com/showthread.php?t=1178112&page=2&p=13475860&viewfull=1#post13475860

99steak;13475860 said:
Debts 0
Two condos worth around $1 million combined. It went down after the pandemic, was 1.5 million before the pandemic.
Interactive brokers account 3 million. It was at 200K before the pandemic. Nearly 70% of the gains was from Novavax. Followed the suggestion from "betting resource" and picked up some call options and the stock directly when it was trading under $10. This time they sent out BB as the next millionaire maker stock for the next catalyst. I will post the email below. If the prediction comes true, my interactive account should break 10 million before 2023.
Sportsbook: Around 400K combined in pinnacle and betcris

Both my rental condos are rented out. Sold the house for $1.2 million recently and have around $1.5 million total in the bank account.

My house hold things are simple average or slightly above average items. Most of my expenses are for experiences. Travel, dining out, events etc.

Total net worth about 6 million. Thanks to the pandemic and betting resource, my net worth more than doubled. Maybe you can make some too in the stock market. Buy yourself BB Jan 2023 $15 and $20 calls for few thousand dollars. Below is the recent email that I received from BR about the next catalyst for the stock market and the potential millionaire maker stock.

Post continued at above url.
 

GameBred

I Trade Therefore I Am
I'd agree with you there. But it was his other remark, which relates to sports betting, that i was more intrigued by.

His comment about public info being in the Price? He's just parroting back shit he's heard, he doesn't know what he's saying even if the general statement, "Public information iis in the current price," is most certainly true.
 

GameBred

I Trade Therefore I Am
His comment about public info being in the Price? He's just parroting back shit he's heard, he doesn't know what he's saying even if the general statement, "Public information iis in the current price," is most certainly true.

Relevant.
 
This is an incorrect understanding of Market Efficiency. The Founder of the theory will tell you that all Prices are wrong but no one knows in which direction. I've heard Fama say it so you can take that for what it's worth.

Efficiency in Sporting Markets is much more cut and dry as it is easily testable.

You also have to ask if the "Price" is efficient throughout it's Finite Life Cycle? Fuck no and that's all you really need to know. Think about it, if it was efficient throughout it's life cycle, Sharps would have nothing to do.

In general, the Major Sporting Markets are Macro-Efficient w/ Micro-Inefficiencies.

GameBred has it down. Efficient Market Theory only applies in efficient markets, and efficiency requires volume. Any single game doesn't qualify.
 

Ray Luca

EOG Master
Nope.

In the past year i've noticed him speaking about beating the closing lines. There is the notion/theory/viewpoint that a number of people have that if anyone consistently beats the closing lines, then they are going to be a winner, or at least probably a winner, in the long run (assuming proper discipline in their betting, i.e. money management). This theory, if i am comprehending his understanding of it, also states that these allegedly sharp closing lines are a result of the "efficient market" (whatever that is supposed to mean in his mind & his definition). And, as the OP states, he intends to provide data disproving the "efficient market" theory.

I noticed him going 0 for 6 minus 12 units yesterday....that ain't easy to do
 

Ray Luca

EOG Master
If you're flipping a coin 6 times a day for 2 decades you'll do that many times. And go 6-0 many times.

I once went 0-10 on one Saturday.

Think u should get a new idol
He's definitely honest
But not a winning player
I've seen his work
 

ComptrBob

EOG Dedicated
If you're flipping a coin 6 times a day for 2 decades you'll do that many times. And go 6-0 many times.

I once went 0-10 on one Saturday.

But you aren't claiming he's a coin flipper at 50%, and you aren't claiming he's only breakeven at 52.38%, and you aren't even claiming he's just 54% with one unit plays. You are claiming he has to be around 56% with approximately 2 unit plays in this case. So the odds of going 6-0 are more than four times higher than going 0-6, i.e. roughly 3.08% vs 0.73%

So about 137 to 1 odds of going 0-6 in 6 picks.
 

GameBred

I Trade Therefore I Am
But you aren't claiming he's a coin flipper at 50%, and you aren't claiming he's only breakeven at 52.38%, and you aren't even claiming he's just 54% with one unit plays. You are claiming he has to be around 56% with approximately 2 unit plays in this case. So the odds of going 6-0 are more than four times higher than going 0-6, i.e. roughly 3.08% vs 0.73%

So about 137 to 1 odds of going 0-6 in 6 picks.

I can't stand it when my Posts aren't the best in a thread, it like never happens..... Stop being so annoying CB :)
 

GameBred

I Trade Therefore I Am
This changes nothing!

I'm still the MJ of EOG.

Ray is still my 49% Partner.

And UniBron is going to commit a Triple Homicide on the 3 Amigos!
 
But you aren't claiming he's a coin flipper at 50%, and you aren't claiming he's only breakeven at 52.38%, and you aren't even claiming he's just 54% with one unit plays. You are claiming he has to be around 56% with approximately 2 unit plays in this case. So the odds of going 6-0 are more than four times higher than going 0-6, i.e. roughly 3.08% vs 0.73%

So about 137 to 1 odds of going 0-6 in 6 picks.

Claiming? Where did i make any such claim? Nowhere.

You say "You are claiming he has to be around 56% with approximately 2 unit plays in this case." Nonsense. I never made such a claim.

BTW, he bets a lot of dogs. Had 3 yesterday, for example, in his going 0-6. Did you include that in your calculation? No.

Did you consider his record YTD, which is 236-301, +7.76 units? No. That's way under 50%, let alone the 56% you stated.
 

ComptrBob

EOG Dedicated
Claiming? Where did i make any such claim? Nowhere.

You say "You are claiming he has to be around 56% with approximately 2 unit plays in this case." Nonsense. I never made such a claim.

BTW, he bets a lot of dogs. Had 3 yesterday, for example, in his going 0-6. Did you include that in your calculation? No.

Did you consider his record YTD, which is 236-301, +7.76 units? No. That's way under 50%, let alone the 56% you stated.

So he's not a coin flipper. Thanks for the info. You posted a bogus example, so try posting the correct analysis.
 
So he's not a coin flipper. Thanks for the info.

Well, duh. I never claimed he was a coin flipper in the sense you used it. Even a cursory glance at his site should have told you otherwise.

You posted a bogus example, so try posting the correct analysis.

Nothing about it was bogus. Bogus applies rather to your erroneous imaginary assumptions that you injected into my statement from your imaginary play world.
 

ComptrBob

EOG Dedicated
Well, duh. I never claimed he was a coin flipper in the sense you used it. Even a cursory glance at his site should have told you otherwise.



Nothing about it was bogus. Bogus applies rather to your erroneous imaginary assumptions that you injected into my statement from your imaginary play world.

Pure deflection. Hey, you're the expert on his goofball's picks, Just post the correct analysis or STFU.
 
Pure deflection. Hey, you're the expert on his goofball's picks, Just post the correct analysis or STFU.

The "correct analysis" is your game & from your imaginary play world. Has nothing to do with me or what i stated. Play that game with yourself. LOL.
 
Top